Recently, in my Urban Studies
class, we were given the assignment of researching a person made prominent in
Memphis history because he or she was chosen for public honor or commemoration.
We were also asked to discuss the role that the person has played in the
overall health of Memphis. Many of my classmates chose Nathan Bedford Forrest
and formerly named Nathan Bedford Forrest Park near downtown Memphis. Much
attention has been drawn to the park in the past year and the name change to
Health Sciences Park. For the most part, our class determined that the park and
memorialization of Forrest has negatively contributed to the health of Memphis.
We also raised the question of how Civil War, and particularly Confederate,
monuments such as the larger than life statue of Nathan Bedford Forrest in
Memphis should be dealt with in the 21st century.
Nathan
Bedford Forrest was one of the most successful military leaders during the
Civil War and he is glorified across the South for his rise from private to
Lieutenant General in the Confederate army. Prior to the Civil War he was a
very successful businessman and slave trader in Memphis. After the Union
victory in the Civil War, Forrest was instrumental in the founding of the Ku
Klux Klan and he eventually served as the Klan’s first Grand Dragon. While
there is disagreement on the extent of Forrest’s involvement in the KKK, it is
clear that he was a member and played a key role in the organization’s
beginning. Upon his death, Forrest was buried in Elmwood Cemetery in Memphis
but his remains were later moved to what is now Health Sciences Park.
Throughout
the past several decades and in recent years there has been much debate as to
whether or not Forrest Park should be renamed. The memorial itself has seen
constant vandalism and been a source of negative sentiment within the Memphis
community. In a city that is over 60 percent African American, it is undeniable
that a commemoration of the first leader of the KKK would cause turmoil.
Supporters of Forrest Park argued that the altering of the name is an attempt
to tamper with history. Many groups also argued that changing the name of the
park is an attempt to discredit the role that the Confederacy played in the
shaping of the South and take away from the history of Memphis. Among other
things, proponents of the name change claimed that the old name honored the
South’s attempt to preserve the institution of slavery and ultimately that it
fostered modern day racism.
In my own
opinion, I think that the commemoration of Nathan Bedford Forrest and naming of
the park is disrespectful to the African American community, especially in a
city like Memphis that was at the forefront of the Civil Rights Movement and
continues to have a very diverse community. I must say, I think that the city
could have come up with a better name than Health Sciences Park, but that is
also part of the question. Could there be a better name for the park? Would
simply calling it Forrest Park have been a better solution? The bigger question
is what should be done about similar monuments across the South. Is it
appropriate to leave such monuments as the Nathan Bedford Forrest statue to preserve
southern history and tradition? Can they remind us of the past and prevent acts
of racism in the future, or do such monuments honor and create increased racist
mentalities?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis is a fascinating question. While it's always tedious and somewhat of a historical taboo, I think that a comparison to post-war Nazi Germany could be apt in this situation.
ReplyDeleteAfter the war, Nazi Swastikas were removed from every building in Germany. Even today, when one is found, it is removed. As far as I can tell, the memory of Naziism is Germany is visually absent, yet psychically omnipresent.
Recently, an Austrian village has come under criticism for apparently "overlooking" a bell tower that pays tribute to Hitler. The bell is similar in size to our Liberty Bell, yet it is engraved with "Heil Hitler," and describes Hitler as the unifier of all Germans. This bell has rang every hour for nearly eighty years. In a town of only 1,500, nobody cared about the bell or the inscriptions on its surface.
However, the issues that this bell brings to light are similar to the ones surfaced by Nathan Bedford Forrest's statue. If we apply a modern definition to Forrest, he was a terrorist. Hitler was worse. However, its dangerous for any society to simply destroy objects of its past, no matter how ugly or gruesome its past may be. I think that its important that this bell in Austria not be destroyed, or even removed, for it serves as a reminder to the horror of the Third Reich, and how easily societies can fall victim to extremist politics. I think a similar argument could be made to Nathan Bedford Forrest's statue: while I believe that a statue may be too glorifying, it would be dangerous to strike the memory of Forrest from the minds of Southerners. The legacy of Nathan Bedford Forrest is important to remember so the specter of our country's racial past doesn't simply disappear (the fact that a debate is even happening over his statue is a testament to the importance of remembering Forrest).
While Germany should certainly make an effort to remodel its public spaces in a way that is as non-Nazi as possible, it should avoid removing every Swastika from public view, for these symbols serves as a visual reminder to the terror of the Third Reich. These Swastikas shouldn't be glorified or elevated in any way: this political symbol should serve as a scarlet letter upon the sleeve of modern German society, lest they forget their history. These pubic reminders could be accompanied by a plaque stating Germany's reasons for leaving a particular Nazi-era object behind. The Hitler Bell may be a perfect opportunity for the German government to do so. It is important not to completely erase a painful memory, no matter how dark.
Memphis should consider removing the statue, but should discuss new (non-glorifying) ways of remembering Nathan Bedford Forrest. Perhaps the City of Memphis could place a plaque on, or next to, the statue stating a very dark, revisionist history of Forrest. Perhaps the city could turn the park into a museum. Yet, Memphis is not the only place that has this issue: Jefferson Davis' statue stands in the United State Capitol, and Mississippi has permeant ownership of Davis' desk on the floor of the Senate. Throughout the United States, cities and States alike grapple with the memory of the Civil War. The South needs to seriously reevaluate the way in which it remembers its Civil War, and post-Civil War, leaders.
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/07/28/austrian-bell-dedicated-to-hitler-raises-controversy/